Assessment - See exactly where you stand, and what it costs to fix

How it runs

Four stages, about a week

1

We scope it with you

What you publish, where, and which standards actually reach your business. Where one does not apply we rule it out on a stated basis, so the question is settled rather than left open.

2

We collect everything we can reach

Every page, every document, third-party records. We read the material rather than asking you to summarise it, because the summary is usually the thing that has already drifted from the source.

3

We assess each claim against its evidence

Every claim anchored to an annotated capture of the exact wording it grades. Not a description of the page. The page. Full captures are retained, so a questioned claim can be answered with what was published and when.

4

You get a costed plan, in the right order

Each action with an effort estimate, a cost range and its basis, an in-house route and an outsourced one. Plus what could go wrong if you act in the wrong sequence. Most engagements find that a majority of the fixes cost nothing.

Deliverables

What you actually receive

Every claim, anchored

Proof you can put in front of a regulator

Every finding tied to the exact published wording it grades, captured and retained. If a claim is questioned later you can show what was published, when, and what you changed.

Screenshot pending An annotated evidence crop: a claim beside the highlighted wording it grades.

Before you act

What fixing it could cost you

Every recommendation carries its second-order effect. Publish your first honest carbon number before you correct the claims sitting next to it, and that number becomes the evidence against them. Same work, different order, opposite outcome.

Screenshot pending A cobra effect card: if we recommend, this could backfire, so implement it this way.

Getting it through the building

Who is going to say no, and what answers them

Someone has to carry this to the person who signs things off. We map the objections they will meet, who is likely holding each one, what it is protecting, and what tends to answer it without telling anyone they were wrong.

Screenshot pending An objection card: the pushback, who holds it, and the answer.

Gap analysis against what applies to youB Corp, European green claims, reporting scope, human rights against the UN Guiding Principles. Each ruled in or out on a stated basis.

Two seats on the platformUsually whoever manages the site and whoever owns certifications.

Verified progressTwo measures side by side: what you say you changed, and what we have verified.

Viewers your teams present fromHeads of department show where they are, in their own words. English and Polish.

An advisor grounded in your own assessmentIt answers from your findings, not from general advice.

Something to give a buyerA version for a customer's supplier file. A dated position with its reasoning, which procurement can actually check.

From people who have had one

What clients say about the assessment

"The report summarises where we are doing well in sharing our public information, but it is even better at showing our gaps. It is very helpful to gauge today, without the expense and time cost of regular audits. The best part is the link to the relevant frameworks."

Mitchel RogersSustainability Advisor, Corde

"Amazing mock up and easy to navigate report, aligning with ESG motivation from within our business lines. Really excited to get stuck in and see what changes we can implement based on this analysis."

Alice FloydSustainability Advisor, Leighs Construction

"A super clear and understandable toolbox on how to further deepen our compliance policy work around ESG against actual standards, identify risks, and where we could be communicating the work we are already doing better."

Fiona BrethertonDevelopment Manager, Untouched World

Grading is HowLegit's and independent of this engagement. These clients are describing the assessment and the platform, which Optomize builds and delivers.

What we have not built yet

We assess other companies on whether their claims match their evidence, so here is ours.

Full digital twin mapping. Our mapping is conversational and document-based. It gets you a working picture of your operations without IoT instrumentation, and it is useful. It is not a live instrumented twin, and we will not call it one.

A multi-agent analysis layer. In development. The analysis today is a mix of automated processing and human judgment, with the human part named wherever it matters.

Costed recommendations in every jurisdiction. We hold benchmark data for some markets and not others. Where we do not have defensible local rates, we say the cost is not stated rather than borrowing a number from somewhere else.

If any of that changes, this page changes with it.

What it costs

From EUR 2,000 for the assessment and the plan, with platform access included. EUR 65 per month for two seats after that, and it is optional. The assessment is yours either way.

What moves the price is the size of your published estate and how many frameworks actually reach you. A single-site business with one product line sits at the bottom of that. A multi-brand group across several jurisdictions is quoted on scope, and we will tell you which one you are on the first call rather than after it.

If the first session does not leave you with something you can act on, say so on the call and you do not pay.

Talk to a Strategist

Want the work done with you rather than handed over? That is Advisory.

Before you ask

The questions we get

How long does it take?

About a week from confirmation for the assessment itself. If you have a deadline, say so on the call and we will tell you honestly whether it is reachable rather than agreeing and finding out later.

What do you need from us?

Very little. We work from what you already publish, so there is no data request, no questionnaire to fill in, and no waiting on your team to compile things. One call to scope it, and a second to walk you through what we found.

Do you need access to our systems?

No. We do not connect to anything, and we do not ask for logins. Everything assessed is material a customer, a regulator or a journalist could reach on their own. That is the point: it is what the outside world can see.

Is it confidential?

The assessment is yours. We do not publish it, and we do not share it. If you want to hand a version to a customer for their supplier file, there is one built for that.

What if we disagree with a finding?

Tell us, with the evidence. Every finding carries a right of reply, and where the evidence changes the finding, the finding changes and the history is kept. Nothing moves on commercial pressure. One re-audit is included, so once you have made the corrections the changed wording is assessed again with a new date against it.

We are not in the EU. Does this still apply?

The frameworks assessed are the ones that actually reach your business, and where one does not apply we rule it out and show the reasoning rather than leaving it open. Plenty of what we find is not regulatory at all: contradictions between your own pages, expired documents still linked, proof filed where a buyer will not look.

Who does the grading?

HowLegit, a partner not-for-profit that sits outside the commercial engagement. Optomize builds and operates the platform and has no role in grading. You cannot buy a better position, only earn one.